Talk:Miswak

Don't insert honorifics
According to Manual_of_Style_%28Islam-related_articles%29 should not be used in article text rather it should be deleted. "(PBUH)" is an example of a honorific. --meco 17:57, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced statements removed
"For experienced users, Miswak can provide better cleaning than a common toothbrush, but its antibacterial action may be far inferior to Triclosan or Chlorhexidine Gluconate which are more widely used as oral disinfectants. Additionally, Carbohydrates present in Miswak may actually assist in bacterial growth if the mouth is not washed properly after use.

It is strongly advisable to consult a qualified physician before depending on Miswak alone for long term oral hygiene."

Pending some citations for these claims/assertions I move the above content here as per WP:V. __meco 16:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Storage/maintenance
Can somebody expand the section on storage/maintenance of the brush? It's not clear if it should be stored in water or just soaked in water before use... - A non-islamic miswak user — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.246.144.38 (talk) 04:43, July 15, 2007 (UTC)

Article trimmed - cleanup tag removed
I trimmed down the article some, moved the unverified claims that miswak "creates a lustre of the face" to the "religious perscriptions" section, and removed the "cleanup needed" tag since I think the article is much more streamlined now. If I violated any wiki etiquitte forgive me, I'm new to editing. - Non Islamic Miswak User — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.246.144.38 (talk) 04:58, July 15, 2007 (UTC)

Removed info about magnolias
I have removed the following blurb: " In 2007, Researchers at the Wrigley Company carried out tests on nine volunteers. Writing in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, they found mints laced with Magnolia (Miswak is Salvadora persica, which belongs to the Magnoliophyta Division of the Plant Kingdom) killed 20 times more bacteria than mints without. After half an hour, the magnolia mint had killed more than 60% of the bacteria, compared to just 3.6% among those who had consumed a normal mint. "Magnolia bark extract demonstrated a significant anti-bacterial activity against organisms responsible for oral malodour and can be incorporated into mints and chewing gum for improved breath freshening benefits." "

First, it's irrelevent. This is an article about branches from Salvadora persica being used as toothbrushes in the context of Islamic tradition, and the relationship between S. persica and magnolias is comparable to the relationship between rice and bananas.

Second, it doesn't cite sources. Enough said there.

150.254.181.174 (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Anon


 * I don't agree with the opinion that this relationship is irrelevant. It is obviously tangential, but I would definitely think that this is information that would be interesting and useful to miswak users as well as researchers. As for the lack of sources, that should be dealt with by adding a citation request. If that request could not be fulfilled within a reasonable time frame I would agree that the information should be removed. So I would propose that this information be put back into the article. __meco (talk) 19:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Removing claims of scientific validity
I have researched the article published on pub med and found no consensus, a tiny sample and significant cultural bias. I am removing the citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.44.90 (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Superiority over Toothbrushes?
Is this credible? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3545237/#!po=5.55556 It's not being currently used in the article, by the way. RocketLauncher2 (talk) 09:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

The article needs to discuss whether there is cultural distortion of the effects – e.g., are people who choose the miswak rather than the toothbrush traditionalists who are also less likely to choose western dietary items containing manufactured sugars which are damaging to teeth and gums? Deipnosophista (talk) 07:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hadith
Over on the toothbrush article I used the following wording:
 * ...in the Islamic world the use of the miswak chewing stick is considered a pious action, based on many references in the hadith.

This seems to me to be fair, and it used an English language source which seems appropriate for an article in English. But, it is immediately reverted by IP editors as "incorrect". I'm not going to get into an edit war over this, but if anyone with an interest wants to take a look, I think my wording is better than what it has been reverted to - which uses an offline reference for "has been prescribed to be used before every prayer five times a day", despite "Had I not thought it difficult for my Ummah, I would have commanded them to use the Miswak (tooth-stick) before every Salat." [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]. Snori (talk) 05:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Liquorice
When I visited India the hotel provided miswak toothpaste. I liked the taste, it seemed very similar to liquorice. At the weekend I visited an English '17th Century Village' that is staffed by re-enactors who research the period in order to be informative to visitors. I was shown liquorice sticks that were apparently used for cleaning teeth during that period (they were presumably imported, along with spices). I strongly suspect that liquorice and miswak are closely related (or even the same). Unfortunately, this article does not provide any scientific classification. Can someone provide it? FreeFlow99 (talk) 10:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)